Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

You are describing an adversarial system gone mad with police on one hand and civilians on the other trying to get away with as much as possible, constrained only by the courts.

I would not wish on anyone to live in such a society.

I'm not an expert, just a layman observing. Michael Hackett seems to have more indepth knowledge on the matter. I guess the final analysis maybe summed up, obey orders and perhaps you want be hurt by the police. We will always see injustices committed by both civilians and police. Chris Rock gave a funny, but often very true, simple steps to avoid being hurt by the police.

I'm not an expert, just a layman observing. Michael Hackett seems to have more indepth knowledge on the matter. I guess the final analysis maybe summed up, obey orders and perhaps you want be hurt by the police. We will always see injustices committed by both civilians and police. Chris Rock gave a funny, but often very true, simple steps to avoid being hurt by the police.

- Yes, for me it is. It is Aikido technically, tactically, and strategically.

Someone wrote: “At no point the civilian is a threat, hands in pockets, not entering when the chance comes up, he is completely passive.”

- When you are an EMT, every patient has a communicative disease, until demonstrated otherwise. When you are wearing a badge and a firearm, every civilian is a threat, until proven otherwise.
- Last year, according to the FBI 2007 Statistics on Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted: 57 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty, and 59,201 suffered assaults while on duty. Of the 57 killed, 21 were killed under the circumstances viewed in the video. Of the officers assaulted, 31% occurred under circumstances viewed in the video. 80.2% of the time, the suspects used personal weapons (hands, fists, feet), to assault the officer.
- One of the most dangerous things when facing a suspect is being unable to see his/her hands (keeping them behind one’s back, in one’s pockets, etc.) This is because the existence of a weapon remains unknown, and that “unknowing” forces the officer into a reactionary state, forcing the officer to be behind in the OODA cycle – which increases the suspect’s likelihood of being successful in his/her assault attempts.
- Weapons, from knives to handguns, etc., are very often kept in folks’ pockets.
- The suspect would not show the officer his hands, would not comply with verbal directions, and would continually re-place his hands in his pockets. In some areas, at some moments, such behavior is not only enough for a suspect to utilize in the slaying of an officer, but it enough for an officer to raise matters near to the level of lethal force. For example, in some places, at some times, it would not have been out of the ordinary for an officer to draw is firearm and point it at the suspect for such behavior.
- The suspect already physically demonstrated aggressive/non-compliant behavior even before the officer approached him – as we can see in the officer’s comment when he first views the guy. Additionally, he is a person suspected of committing battery upon another.
- In short, this is not a normal situation, the suspect is not a normal person, and the officer would have been a fool to act (further down on a use of force spectrum) otherwise. * To tip my hand: At minimum, that would have been a Taser out call for me. Instructions would have been given for him to sit on the ground (legs out, ankles crossed, hand visible on his lap), not walk passed me to my car. Non-compliance for that amount of time, with that number or verbal repetitions, ZAP!

Someone wrote: “I'm not sure... it looks more like he struck the guy (and followed through) with a palm strike to the throat. Not so Aiki to me (but hey I'm not really an Aikido master or something)”

- If Aiki is a way of harmonizing with universal principles, if it is a way of universal reconciliation, both martial and spiritual, both personal and global, both internally and externally, etc., then it must include all aspects of existence. It cannot by default be synonymous with softness, indirectness, gentleness, etc., and with a rejection of those aspects that are opposite to things. Such a standpoint is not a reconciliation but rather a mere exclusion and then by default non-Aiki. I am reminded here of a radio interview Osensei did, one where the interviewer asks Osensei something like, “Is it true there are not strikes in Aikido, no offense?” Osensei laughs, laughing at the absurdity of the questions, and states that for Aikido to truly be universal it must include offense as much as defense, etc. Others with better memory than mine can chime in and make this point better – please.

Was the suspect unskilled?

- Forgetting for the time being that even unskilled/untrained suspects injure and/or kill officers, I believe the suspect was more likely trained than not trained. Cues for this are that the suspect took several steps into the back-fall and tucked his chin, keeping his head off of the ground. These are not intuitive behaviors. Look to your beginners in your dojo and see how many right off the bat leave the feet in place and fail to tuck their chin. Additionally, but definitely less trustworthy, his style of dress and grooming smells of MMA sub-culture, as does his reported fighting.

Someone wrote: “I wouldn't assume the guy was unskilled, but I agree the use of force seemed excessive. I wasn't commenting on whether or not it worked. I just thought it looked like kata, partly because "uke" didn't really seem to be offering much of an attack.”

- A thing this touches on for me is that this is not sport or dojo culture we are dealing with here. What often goes totally without saying, as far as what a luxury it is, is that sport and dojo culture have established start and stop times. Violence outside of these controlled environments, because start and stop points are never established in the streets, can only erupt into our plain of existence. This is the main reason why law enforcement and military personal have constant debates over vigilance and what it means to maintain it. Such energy is a testament that one does not know, cannot know, when or how violence is going to rear its head; that violence is, for the most part, completely unexpected. As a result, waiting for fully developed attacks to establish themselves, as is most often done in Kihon Waza training, in non-controlled environments, not only means you are way late, but that you were ignorant of a whole lot of cues you should have picked up on but didn’t. From this point of view, while his resistance seemed “passive” it contained within it a lot of aggressive behavior. This is most often noticeable from the opposite perspective. Imagine it is you, and you were NOT fighting in the street, and an officer comes up to you because he/she thinks you match the description of the suspect… He says, “Can I talk to you?” You say, “Yeah sure officer.” He says, “Can you do me a favor and take your hands out of your pocket?” You say, “Yeah sure officer.” You see where this is going? You wouldn’t act like this person at all, as “normal/innocent” citizen would.

Someone wrote: “From that point forward it is the officer just being unprofessional and excessive. If the subject cracked his head or received a concussion--oh yea, the lawyers are going after the deep pockets of LVPD and he is the means to get at them.”

- Check out this Taser shot and watch what happens to the back of her head – in a not altogether different situation. While I stated I would have gone with a Taser shot, I can easily conceded that lost of control the suspect will most likely have over absorbing the back fall (steps to the rear, tucked chin, etc.):

What if the officer had chosen a less decisive method to close with and apprehend the suspect?

What if the guy pulled a knife?

What if it then became a weapons retention issue for the officer?

What if this guy was a proficient groundfighter?

Was it better to be decisive and act in a rapid and violent manner that resulted in suprise and quick resolution?

or would it have been better to allow for all those other factors to become variables and result in a larger escalation of force with baton, spray, tasers, or even sidearm?

What is the margin of error when making a decisive and quick action to gain control (OODA)? How much time do you have?

From the video you see that the suspect was taken down and cuffed with very little actual injury compared to what might have happened.

That much we know! We can see it.

Lots of unknowns though and I have an imagination that tells me that it could have gone many ways alot worse for all involved.

Maybe the Cop DID constrain his action. Maybe he was a judoka and he let his right leg slide by instead of using a full reap and sweep that would have resulted in the suspect going full on his head instead of falling the way he did!

don't know.

Again, we can see how it ended in the video, and everyone lived another day with no real injury!

Decisive and violence of action....YES.

Outcome, we see it on the tape.

What MIGHT have happened and a kinder and gentler approach have been chosen. We don't know do we?

We need to focus on the results of the action, I think, not the emotional aspects of them.

It appeared that the Cop applied Escalation of Force criteria as well. that does not require you to have Tea and Biscuits and get to know each other very well in seiza!

When you are an EMT, every patient has a communicative disease, until demonstrated otherwise. When you are wearing a badge and a firearm, every civilian is a threat, until proven otherwise.

Don't know about EMT (Emergency Medical Technician) As to "badge and firearm" this is just not so. In environment where "every civilian is a threat", things look completely different, check out video reports from Baghdad or the West Bank.

Quote:

Last year, according to the FBI 2007 Statistics on Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted: 57 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in the line of duty,

One of the most dangerous things when facing a suspect is being unable to see ...

This is highly technical. I guess various agencies have this analysed and internalised to the required level. Posters in this thread with law enforcement experience, commented that within the context presented in the videos, the force seems to be excessive.

Quote:

The suspect would not show the officer his hands, would not comply with verbal directions, and would continually re-place his hands in his pockets.

A suspect, not the suspect (there are two of them), keeps his thumbs (not hands) continuously in his pockets. There is no need to add things that are not there.

Quote:

In some areas, at some moments, such behavior is not only enough for a suspect to utilize in the slaying of an officer, but it enough for an officer to raise matters near to the level of lethal force.

Are you are saying that the cop is not using enough force? In that case should he not as aggressive towards the other suspect that approaches his car to "give directions". Isn't the cop in peril at that point? After all other suspect's hands are not constantly visible.

Quote:

The suspect already physically demonstrated aggressive/non-compliant behavior even before the officer approached him -- as we can see in the officer's comment when he first views the guy.

Non compliant yes, aggressive no. I did not really understood the cop's comment, what does it mean?

Quote:

Additionally, he is a person suspected of committing battery upon another.

In the video this is described in the bland official language as "two males fighting". There is no need to add color.

Quote:

...states that for Aikido to truly be universal it must include offense as much as defense

No argument here, except that in this case there was very little to be offensive/defensive about.

Quote:

I believe the suspect was more likely trained than not trained.

I originally suggested that he was unskilled, but off course there is no way for me to know. What he is not is "on", so the skills he may or may not posses are irrelevant, in the same way a powerfull computer is irrelevant if it is not on.

Q: Why does Joe Public (no relation to Joe the Plumber.....hah!) think your average officer is almost as much a threat as the "bad guys"?

A: "When you are wearing a badge and a firearm, every civilian is a threat, until proven otherwise."

Yes, there will always be incidents where officers will have quickly and decisively move-up the action/reaction lethality scale. In this video the officer moved faster along the scale than seemed warranted.

Again, cops have dangerous, complicated, stressful, under-appreciated jobs, and we should thank those who choose to serve.

But they arent soldiers dealing with constant threat from the population they are trying to serve and protect. If they are, make them parking metre readers, and get the real constant-threat specialists involved in policing the streets....the military. At least, they dont pretend to be anything other than what they are.

As for that video, a belligerent, drunk, hysterical individual already shackled and in police custody could not be contained by THREE officers? At least they could see her hands at all times....

As a result, waiting for fully developed attacks to establish themselves, as is most often done in Kihon Waza training, in non-controlled environments, not only means you are way late, but that you were ignorant of a whole lot of cues you should have picked up on but didn't. From this point of view, while his resistance seemed "passive" it contained within it a lot of aggressive behavior.

I agree with your point about waiting too long. Aikido as I understand it implies constant proactive behavio. I also think the suspect displayed some aggressive signs of personality/intent...not to mention, assuming he did just get out of a fight, his aggression was probably greater than it would be in a normal state. These are dangerous signs in my very limited experience, so i can see why a cop would take them even more seriously.
For me it comes down to how much information the cop had. If there were a bunch of witnesses who ID'd the suspect as having been in a crime and he didn't comply, the take down seems warranted to me. If all it was was some guy calling the police and pointing the finger, I don't think it was warranted. More discussion should have taken place if that were the case...and maybe the first officer at the scene already tried that. My general view of the police is they should assume everyone is dangerous, unpredictable, and absolutely innocent until proven guilty.
Cops have a tough job. I also believe they should be held to the highest standards. The sad, but necessary result of those ideas is that cops start out with a certain disadvantage...which is why they should ALWAYS work in groups of 2 or more in my opinion. Just as I must use the whole of my resources to overpower someone stronger than me, cops must really utilize their resources. And these days they're not only fighting crime, but the increasingly negative perceptions of society at large and that is far more dangerous in the long run...in my opinion. Because it takes respectful and compliant people and makes them contemptuous and non-compliant.
Take care,
Matt

But they arent soldiers dealing with constant threat from the population they are trying to serve and protect. If they are, make them parking metre readers, and get the real constant-threat specialists involved in policing the streets....the military. At least, they dont pretend to be anything other than what they are.

I would venture that police officers are in a worse position than soldiers.
If a car is in Iraq screaming towards a military checkpoint and the soldiers shoot and kill the driver for not stopping where upon it turns out it was just a guy with bad eye sight in a hurry what happens?
Investigation team comes in, interviews people. If the soldiers followed their rules of engagement (Car did not heed hand signals, car did not heed warning shots-killed driver) then the soldiers are released of fault.

What happens when a police officer shoots someone he viewed as a threat but just turns out to be someone being an idiot? Teenager pointing an airsoft gun at him for example. Not such an open and shut case for the cop.

Add to the fact that every person a cop meets can be a violent criminal or murderer. The cop in one of these youtube videos posted in this thread has the lights punched out of him by that black male. How easy would be for that guy to grab the cops gun and put 4 rounds into his back?
Soldiers can afford to be hyper alert for a half a year or year. A street cops "tour of duty" can last 20 year. Day in day out, I can't imagine what kind of stress that puts on someone.
And when they let their guard down bam the guy behind the door of the noise complaint he's serving starts shooting. The time between violent incidents with LEOs just means they have longer time to set in for skill fade and become complaicent.

I know a lot of soldiers who have quit and tried to become cops. It surprises them how hard it can be. "I have military training why wouldn't I make a great cop?"
Because cops aren't military, they can't be. Police officers now more than ever act like social workers. The military get tasked with performing police actions more and more but at the core their killers. Not wise to have lions guarding a flock of sheep.

Quote:

As for that video, a belligerent, drunk, hysterical individual already shackled and in police custody could not be contained by THREE officers? At least they could see her hands at all times....

I hear this a lot over at bullshido.
It took 3 cops to hold down a guy? LOL WTF?
Yes it does. Anyone who's been in a situation with someone wigging out will tell you it can take 5 or 6 fully grown men to control someone. One on one I've controlled someone breaking their arm in the process with a kotegaeshi (sp?) and I've also been in a group of 5 guys trying to hold someone down who was half the weight of our smallest guy. I've got in a drunken fist fight against 4-5 guys and I won. Bouncer said he's actually seen it more often than you would think.

Add also the fact any injuries sustained to the idiot is going to be investigated, LEOs are constantly under the gun. Any use of force gets investigated. SO it might have taken 3 guys to get control of someone but that might have been because they didn't want to injure the dude. How often do we hear about someone resisting arrest, getting banged up then suing the police? Man I don't evvy LEOs.

People who haven't been in these situations and seen for themselves how insane it can be are hard pressed IMO to comment on use of force.

Let me state that the actions of the officer are in no way, shape or form excessive or cruel. That is my opinion, I have right to it, and it comes after almost 25 years on the job. I have been in the position of investigating those allegations of excessive use of force, and the are not always exonerated. I have had those types of allegations lodged against me, and have never been found excessive or unreasonable.

Sadly enough, one of the most recent nationally publicized cases is from right here in Warren, Ohio. Due to the overzealousness of the Safety Service Director, this officer retained his position.

Even more distressing is that there were four other officers at the scene, and not one of them attempted to assist placing Gill into custody. Tasers have a time and place, this was not one of them.

If you have never been in the situation to deprive the liberty of an individual, you have no base of reference on how to act. Even if you have been placed into custody and incarcerated, you were experiencing only one side of the action. Depending on your culpability and physical demeanor at that time, you still do not possess a objective view.

Observation and perspective are unique to each individual. They often are different when it comes to relating what has transpired. Just remember, it is the totality of circumstances, because there are many times that what you observed is not what is true.

Because cops aren't military, they can't be. Police officers now more than ever act like social workers. The military get tasked with performing police actions more and more but at the core their killers. Not wise to have lions guarding a flock of sheep.

Which was my point; those guarding the sheep are thinking more like killers and less like officers of the peace. I certainly hope our social workers do not bring that attitude to their profession. Again, it cant be easy out there as an officer, but the mindset of us vs. them is in my opinion bordering on antisocial.

Quote:

Grant Wagar wrote:

I hear this a lot over at bullshido.
It took 3 cops to hold down a guy? LOL WTF?
Yes it does. Anyone who's been in a situation with someone wigging out will tell you it can take 5 or 6 fully grown men to control someone. One on one I've controlled someone breaking their arm in the process with a kotegaeshi (sp?) and I've also been in a group of 5 guys trying to hold someone down who was half the weight of our smallest guy. I've got in a drunken fist fight against 4-5 guys and I won. Bouncer said he's actually seen it more often than you would think.
Add also the fact any injuries sustained to the idiot is going to be investigated, LEOs are constantly under the gun. Any use of force gets investigated. SO it might have taken 3 guys to get control of someone but that might have been because they didn't want to injure the dude. How often do we hear about someone resisting arrest, getting banged up then suing the police? Man I don't evvy LEOs.
People who haven't been in these situations and seen for themselves how insane it can be are hard pressed IMO to comment on use of force.

I didnt say it took three of them to hold her down, I said it took three of them (only one verbal instructing) to make her comply; no comply, in a police station, shackled....taser.

I will admit that, once again, that short video might have been in the context of some 30-minute attempt to make her comply....you never know.

I agree with most of the rest of what you said, hard not to.

Mr. Gelum,

From what I am seeing in this thread, neither the law enforcement community nor the public posses a completely objective view; that is why forums exist, so the points can be debated, and everyone can at least be exposed to the differing arguments.

Mr. Shaw & Mr. Valadez,

Aiki and police being obeyed are not the same thing, not by a longshot. There might an aikido-based technique in the atemi to the throat, but strategically and tactically? That is simply nailing the other guy before he nails you. In my books, that is pretty far from aikido. That is combat; we as aikidoka should be striving for something greater. Remember (yes, flowery, but he still said it)....

"Aikido is not an art to fight with enemies and defeat them. It is a way to lead all human beings to live in harmony with each other as though everyone were one family. The secret of aikido is to make yourself become one with the universe and to go along with its natural movements. One who has attained this secret holds the universe in him/herself and can say, "I am the universe."

Something interesting happened to us the other day, made me finally put an obvious two and two together. We were at a domestic, both parties diagnosed with Bi-Polar Disorder. The female half, quite cooperative at first, snaps when a fellow deputy was trying to escort her a bit more away from the male half - so she could get her ID which she said was in the other room and to help them stop yelling at each other, etc. She starts fighting the deputy, his on-scene partner draws his Taser, but the original deputy opts to go hands-on and asks his partner to re-holster his taser and assist with controlling her arms. The woman, about 5-7, 110 lbs, very flexible, starts fighting harder. They not wanting to injure her, continued to opt on the side of "as minimum as possible - even at the cost of prolonging the situation or suffering injury themselves." In the end, the woman ends up scratching the heck out of the initial deputy - blood everywhere. The woman is arrested for felony domestic violence and battery on a police officer. She suffers no injury and per her own statement requires no medication attention. We take her to the hospital anyways - where she is medically cleared. The deputy has to go as well - per policy. At the jail, the woman informs personnel that she has Hepatitis B. The deputy has to go back to the hospital and begin a series of examinations that last pretty much the entire shift. The chance of infection is slight, but nonetheless present - which means there's a chance of bringing it home to your spouse and kids, etc.

It made me think... The tactics of dog-piles, holds, and arm-controls predates the rampant viral infections present in the world today as much as they do the Taser. Such things, maybe, just maybe, might be out-dated, or at least the signs of the times should be considered when we make tactical decisions today.

It made me think... The tactics of dog-piles, holds, and arm-controls predates the rampant viral infections present in the world today as much as they do the Taser. Such things, maybe, just maybe, might be out-dated, or at least the signs of the times should be considered when we make tactical decisions today.

Which was my point; those guarding the sheep are thinking more like killers and less like officers of the peace. I certainly hope our social workers do not bring that attitude to their profession. Again, it cant be easy out there as an officer, but the mindset of us vs. them is in my opinion bordering on antisocial.

I didnt say it took three of them to hold her down, I said it took three of them (only one verbal instructing) to make her comply; no comply, in a police station, shackled....taser.

I will admit that, once again, that short video might have been in the context of some 30-minute attempt to make her comply....you never know.

I agree with most of the rest of what you said, hard not to.

Mr. Gelum,

From what I am seeing in this thread, neither the law enforcement community nor the public posses a completely objective view; that is why forums exist, so the points can be debated, and everyone can at least be exposed to the differing arguments.

Mr. Shaw & Mr. Valadez,

Aiki and police being obeyed are not the same thing, not by a longshot. There might an aikido-based technique in the atemi to the throat, but strategically and tactically? That is simply nailing the other guy before he nails you. In my books, that is pretty far from aikido. That is combat; we as aikidoka should be striving for something greater. Remember (yes, flowery, but he still said it)....

"Aikido is not an art to fight with enemies and defeat them. It is a way to lead all human beings to live in harmony with each other as though everyone were one family. The secret of aikido is to make yourself become one with the universe and to go along with its natural movements. One who has attained this secret holds the universe in him/herself and can say, "I am the universe."

This is where we part ways. We don't believe in Omoto, but respect those who do. At my dojo, my sensei does not advocate spiritual Aikido concepts. We are only concern with technique and the methodology of Aiki, while having a lot of fun doing so. Spiritual concepts of soft flow are not used. We have our own individual religious beliefs of uniting humanity in a peaceful manner. Aikido for me is strictly self defense, nothing else.

This is where we part ways. We don't believe in Omoto, but respect those who do. At my dojo, my sensei does not advocate spiritual Aikido concepts. We are only concern with technique and the methodology of Aiki, while having a lot of fun doing so. Spiritual concepts of soft flow are not used. We have our own individual religious beliefs of uniting humanity in a peaceful manner. Aikido for me is strictly self defense, nothing else.

Fair enough. Well put.
To be clear, where I have had most of my aikido training, both are pursued in equally important amounts; martial effectiveness within the context of restoring or achieving peace. Hard? Yup. At odds? Sometimes, sure.

Aiki and police being obeyed are not the same thing, not by a longshot. There might an aikido-based technique in the atemi to the throat, but strategically and tactically? That is simply nailing the other guy before he nails you. In my books, that is pretty far from aikido. That is combat; we as aikidoka should be striving for something greater. Remember (yes, flowery, but he still said it)....

I'd call that kuzushi on contact, which is the heart of Aikido.

Quote:

Nick Pittson wrote:

"Aikido is not an art to fight with enemies and defeat them."

What fight? I didn't see a fight. I just saw someone getting taken down, there was no fight. What I saw was the sword that decides life or death in a single instant.

Which was my point; those guarding the sheep are thinking more like killers and less like officers of the peace. I certainly hope our social workers do not bring that attitude to their profession. Again, it cant be easy out there as an officer, but the mindset of us vs. them is in my opinion bordering on antisocial....

Please don't get me wrong. I am suggesting that peace officers should at all times remain professional - which includes high levels of courtesy and compassion, etc. However, at all times, officers need to remain cautious - this is the base for my comment about all being threats until proven otherwise. For me, this is not an "us vs them," even if we broaden "us" to include all law abiding citizens and "them" to mean citizens who do not abide by the law. This is just the nature of the environment one finds him/herself in. As such, it does not mean that all actions are justified, but it does mean that under any given set of conditions, some actions become warranted as others are relegated to the side of ignorance.

For me, I see only a loose connection between listening to a peace officer and Aikido - namely in that a cultivation of Aiki promotes an overall wellness, which in turn often coordinates with good citizenship, which in turn often allows one to be in good terms with representatives of society (e.g. public officials, peace officers, fellow citizens, etc.). Still a connection is present. However, I was not referring to this when I said the technique is part of Aikido. For example, tactically the technique used is in many aikido dojo actually named - i.e. it's a prescribed and practiced technique recognized by Aikido institutions. Additionally, the suspect in his intention and body provided yin energy, which gave the opening for the yang maneuver - a blending of yin and yang. If one considers Aikido techniques to include notions of "minimum violence" and "care for the attacker" (and I do not), the technique included an attempt to capture the suspect's arm so as to lower him to the ground. Strategically, it included the notion of keep the initiative, seek kuzushi, and lead the opponent's mind away from one's true intentions.

I agree with your take on Aikido being a personal journey. However, much of our individual capacities toward the luxuries of personal journeys is based upon the fact that there are some that step in harm's way so that the rest of us do not have to. For those that do, they take what is internal with them. Thus, for me, an Aikidoka that goes into law enforcement, and that by the nature of his/her duty and its environment, has to apply a technique from Aikido's varied curriculum, does not stop practicing his/her Aikido, personal or otherwise. In short, for me, there is no absolute division between combat and Aikido - as no Man can be so clearly partitioned, so too no Art. If an Aikido cannot include or does not include a person walking into combative environments, or if an Aikido cannot maintain its integrity so as to continue to exist in such combative environments, it does not mean that no Aikido can. For me, as a citizen, I am more partial to law enforcement officers that are trained in Aikido, that practice Aikido, than do not. As a peace officer myself, I having a feeling the citizens I come into contact with, criminal and not criminal, are also grateful for my Aikido practice. This holds true even when my Aikido has to occur within a combative environment and take on objectives less important than spiritual maturity and/or Awakening, etc.

Kuzushi, ideally, is attained without an atemi. Otherwise, a kick in the nuts is also considered kuzushi. Or a grab and twist to the nuts would also be acceptable.

Quote:

Alex Lawrence wrote:

What fight? I didn't see a fight. I just saw someone getting taken down, there was no fight. What I saw was the sword that decides life or death in a single instant.

The sword was drawn I agree; the officer drew his sword first, nothing more. His sword of aiki, had there been one, would have been far more benevolent in execution and intent. Taking it out and using it first is not awase, kuzushi or anything else remotely aiki related.

There might an aikido-based technique in the atemi to the throat, but strategically and tactically? That is simply nailing the other guy before he nails you. In my books, that is pretty far from aikido. That is combat; we as aikidoka should be striving for something greater. Remember (yes, flowery, but he still said it)...

He also said:

"Tori: Step out on your right foot and strike directly at your opponent's face with your right te-gatana and punch his ribs with your left fist (9).
Uke: Receive your opponent's attack with the right arm.
Tori: Put strength in your right arm and cut down sharply, holding your opponent's wrist and controlling his right elbow (10). Step into his right with your left foot, keeping his right arm against your body, and pull him to your front (11). Move forward and pin him to the ground. (This is called Pin Number One.) You can then pin your partner's right arm with your legs and strike his neck with your right te-gatana..."

Cut and pasted from Budo, Teachings of the Founder of Aikido

So in my book what the cop did not only was aikido but also I think the suspect was very lucky: the cop was not O Sensei.

Mr. Valadez,
Thank you for clarifying; I may have read more into your initial post and its choice of words.

Mr. Cereijo,
I do not have my copy of Budo here at work, but I suspect that just before the quote you supplied, uke was doing something....my guess was he was attacking nage, not refusing to follow orders, or just standing around minding his own business.

Kuzushi, ideally, is attained without an atemi. Otherwise, a kick in the nuts is also considered kuzushi. Or a grab and twist to the nuts would also be acceptable.

Life isn't ideal, you blend, harmonise and adapt to it. To be gentle in a situation where it's best not to be isn't Aikido, in fact you've created a blockage in your decision making process which may cause more violence than there needs to be.

Quote:

Nick Pittson wrote:

The sword was drawn I agree; the officer drew his sword first, nothing more. His sword of aiki, had there been one, would have been far more benevolent in execution and intent. Taking it out and using it first is not awase, kuzushi or anything else remotely aiki related.

Hmm. If he had been softer the technique might have failed, a fight would have broken out, and the situation would have become more violent, with more potential for injury and death.
In that case the compassionate thing to do is to be brutal with the take down to avoid failure and end the situation before the opponent can respond.